Marine Corps Lt. Col. Amy McGrath defeated Lexington Mayor Jim Gray for the Democratic nomination to take on incumbent U.S. Rep. Andy Barr (R).

Style, not policy, separated Gray and McGrath as they competed for the Democratic nod in Kentucky’s 6th District.^[1] Each said they would work with President Donald Trump on specific issues, and both said they might oppose Nancy Pelosi as House Democratic leader.^[2]

But the similarities ended there.

Gray was encouraged to run by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) and would have been able to self-fund, if necessary. He said he was the only Democrat who could win in the general election, having carried the district in 2016 when he unsuccessfully challenged Rand Paul (R) for U.S. Senate.

McGrath achieved national fame with campaign videos highlighting her military experience and used that fame to build a national fundraising network. McGrath painted Gray as the party’s choice for the seat and herself as the outsider.^[3]

A potential threat to Gray and McGrath was state Sen. Reggie Thomas, who ran to their left on healthcare and gun policy. Thomas could have won with a plurality if Gray and McGrath had split the vote. Heading into the primary, both campaigns’ internal polls showed him well behind.^[4]

Election forecasters gave Barr, who won re-election in 2016 by more than 20 points, an edge in the general election.

Kentucky voter? Dates you need to know.
Primary election	May 22, 2018
Candidate filing deadline	January 30, 2018
Registration deadline	April 23, 2018^[5]
Absentee application deadline	May 15, 2018^[6]
General election	November 6, 2018
Voting information
Primary type	Closed
Early voting deadline	6pm on May 22, 2018 (only for qualified voters; see here for a list of qualifications)^[6]
Polling locations: Go to this page to find early voting locations and your assigned precinct for election day.

For more on related elections, please see:

Candidates and election results

The following candidates ran in the Democratic primary for U.S. House Kentucky District 6 on May 22, 2018.

Democratic primary for U.S. House Kentucky District 6

		Candidate	%	Votes
✔		Amy McGrath	48.7	48,860
		Jim Gray	40.5	40,684
		Reggie Thomas	7.2	7,226
		Geoff M. Young	1.6	1,574
		Daniel Kemph	1.2	1,240
	Submit photo	Theodore Green	0.8	835

	There were no incumbents in this race. The results have been certified.	Total votes: 100,419
= candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey.
If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey.
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team.

Election updates

Endorsements

May 13, 2018: The Lexington Herald-Leader endorsed Jim Gray.
April 21, 2018: The United Steelworkers union endorsed Jim Gray.

Polls

See also: Ballotpedia's approach to covering polls

April 21, 2018: An internal poll for the Amy McGrath campaign showed her leading the field with 42 percent support. Gray was in second with 35 percent and Thomas was in third with six percent. Three percent of respondents chose another candidate and 14 percent were undecided.
April 9, 2018: An internal poll for the Jim Gray campaign showed him leading the field with 52 percent support. McGrath was in second with 19 percent. Thomas received six percent, and 23 percent of voters were undecided. In response, Amy McGrath released an internal poll that showed her performing better against Andy Barr in the November general election.^[7]

Campaign finance

May 2, 2018: The candidates disclosed the following campaign finance information:
- Amy McGrath had raised more than $2 million and had more than $300,000 in cash on hand.
- Jim Gray had raised more than $1.3 million and had nearly $440,000 in cash on hand.
- Reggie Thomas had raised about $330,000 and had less than $15,000 in cash on hand.
April 5, 2018: Jim Gray's campaign announced that he raised $790,000 in the first quarter of 2018 and $1.13 million since he began his campaign in December. McGrath's campaign later announced that it raised $587,000 in the first quarter and was at almost $1.7 million in total. Thomas raised about $61,000 in the first quarter and was at about $230,000 in total.^[8]

Candidate forums

April 18, 2018: Jim Gray, Amy McGrath, and Reggie Thomas participated in a candidate forum. See full coverage from U.S. News and World Report and the Lexington Herald-Leader.

Satellite spending

May 16-18, 2018: With Honor spent more than $100,000 supporting Amy McGrath.
May 7, 2018: The With Honor Fund, a veterans organization which endorsed Amy McGrath, disclosed $14,500 in spending opposing Jim Gray.^[9]

Candidates

See also: Statistics on U.S. Congress candidates, 2018

Top candidates

The candidates featured below reported at least $100,000 in receipts as of the end of the fourth quarter of 2017.^[10] They are presented in alphabetical order.

Jim Gray (D)

Jim Gray's experience includes serving as the mayor of Lexington and operating his family business, Gray Construction.^[11] He ran for the U.S. Senate in 2016 and lost to Rand Paul (R-Ky.) by about 15 points.

"People are asking me, 'Why, Jim, are you running for Congress?'" Gray said in a campaign ad. "Well, I will tell you all that I feel like that I've been lucky in my life, and I've pretty much lived the American dream... But that dream... that dream, for too many people, is threatened today, and it's really in trouble. Healthcare costs rising out the ceiling. Our education costs doing the very same thing. And wages not keeping up, in order for people to keep up and catch up. But I do believe, with all my heart, that you all can have better representation in Washington from somebody who's not bought and paid for by special interests. From somebody whose heart really is in this for the right reasons."^[12]

In a December 2017 speech launching his congressional campaign, Gray cited a need to work across partisan lines as a motivating factor in his run: "We need to bring people together; we need to reach across partisan lines."^[13] Gray said he would not support Nancy Pelosi as House Democratic leader if elected.^[14]

Gray's campaign website identified his policy priorities as jobs & wages, healthcare, and education. It also emphasized his experience and what he called his "unique position to win in November."^[11] Gray has received an endorsement from the Victory Fund, which supports LGBTQ candidates running for office.^[15] He said he was encouraged to run by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), but he did not receive an official endorsement.^[16]

Amy McGrath (D)

Amy McGrath's experience includes service as a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Marine Corps and work as a defense and foreign affairs policy advisor to U.S. Rep. Susan Davis (D), as the Pentagon's Marine Corps liaison to other federal agencies, and as a member of the political science faculty at the U.S. Naval Academy.^[17]

"I'm running for Congress against Andy Barr in my home state of Kentucky," McGrath said in her campaign announcement video. "He's [Senate Majority Leader] Mitch McConnell's handpicked congressman, who said he would vote enthusiastically to take healthcare away from over a quarter million Kentuckians... This is my new mission: To take on a Congress full of career politicians who treat the people of Kentucky like they're disposable. Some are telling me a Democrat can't win that battle in Kentucky, that we can't take back our country for my kids and yours. We'll see about that."^[18]

McGrath's campaign website identified her policy priorities as healthcare, foreign policy, sexual harassment, medical marijuana & legalization, guns, money in politics, and climate change.^[19] She said she would work to improve the Affordable Care Act by offering a public option and allowing persons over 55 to buy into Medicare.^[20]

McGrath received endorsements from U.S. Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) and VoteVets PAC.^[21]^[22]

Reggie Thomas (D)

State Sen. Reggie Thomas trailed opponents Jim Gray and Amy McGrath in media attention and fundraising in the Democratic primary. However, according to the Southern Political Report, Gray and McGrath could have divided the electorate and allowed Thomas to win a plurality of the vote based on his service as a state senator, his academic credentials and his political skills. Political journalist Al Cross said that Thomas "meets well" and that "[h]e’s a good politician."^[4]

Thomas' campaign website highlighted his positions on healthcare, 'education, and jobs in the state. His website says, "It's time that we have a representative in Washington who will put the people of Kentucky first."^[23]

Thomas was first elected to the Kentucky State Senate in a 2013 special election. Prior to that, he taught at Kentucky State University and the University of Kentucky College of Law. He earned a bachelor's degree from Dartmouth College in 1975 and a Juris Doctor from Harvard University in 1978.

List of all candidates

Democratic primary candidates

Political reaction to outcome

Vox: "McGrath positioned herself as an outsider from day one, taking the DCCC’s lack of an initial endorsement and running with it. Even as the organization sent out an email on Tuesday night praising McGrath’s win and looking forward to the general election in November, the nominee pointed to how party insiders believed she couldn’t win at the start...Throughout the campaign, McGrath branded herself as a change agent, part of a new generation of young candidates and Congress members, and touted her lack of political experience — the very thing her Democratic opponents attacked her for."^[24]

CNN: "The win for McGrath is the latest evidence of a political climate in which voters are eager to cast out those they see as figures of the political establishment. It also showed the strength of female candidates amid the "Me Too" movement."^[25]

Think Progress: "McGrath’s win Tuesday appears to be buoyed by strong Democratic turnout in rural counties in the district. In Robertson county, the Democratic turnout Tuesday was more than double than it was for the primary between former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) in 2016, jumping from 295 people two years ago to 699 people Tuesday night."^[26]

DCCC Chair Rep. Ben Ray Luján: "Battle-tested in more ways than one, Amy McGrath ran a tremendous race to win this competitive primary and could not be in a stronger position to win in November. Amy has built a formidable campaign, and voters across the district have responded to her message of leadership and standing up for affordable health care.”^[24]

Timeline

May 16-18, 2018: With Honor spent more than $100,000 supporting Amy McGrath.
May 13, 2018: The Lexington Herald-Leader endorsed Jim Gray.
May 7, 2018: The With Honor Fund, a veterans organization which endorsed Amy McGrath, disclosed $14,500 in spending opposing Jim Gray.^[9]
May 2, 2018: The candidates disclosed the following campaign finance information:
- Amy McGrath had raised more than $2 million and had more than $300,000 in cash on hand.
- Jim Gray had raised more than $1.3 million and had nearly $440,000 in cash on hand.
- Reggie Thomas had raised about $330,000 and had less than $15,000 in cash on hand.
April 21, 2018: The United Steelworkers union endorsed Jim Gray.
April 21, 2018: An internal poll for the Amy McGrath campaign showed her leading the field with 42 percent support. Gray was in second with 35 percent and Thomas was in third with six percent. Three percent of respondents chose another candidate and 14 percent were undecided.
April 18, 2018: Jim Gray, Amy McGrath, and Reggie Thomas participated in a candidate forum. See full coverage from U.S. News and World Report and the Lexington Herald-Leader,
April 17, 2018: Amy McGrath released a television advertisement titled "Same Team."
April 9, 2018: An internal poll for the Jim Gray campaign showed him leading the field with 52 percent support. McGrath was in second with 19 percent. Thomas received six percent, and 23 percent of voters were undecided.
April 5, 2018: Jim Gray's campaign announced that he raised $790,000 in the first quarter of 2018 and $1.13 million since he began his campaign in December. McGrath's campaign later announced that it raised $587,000 in the first quarter and was at almost $1.7 million in total. Thomas raised about $61,000 in the first quarter and was at about $230,000 in total.^[27]
April 3, 2018: Amy McGrath released a television advertisement titled "Toughest Mission."
April 2, 2018: Jim Gray released his first two television advertisements of the campaign. They were titled "Potholes" and "Grayisms."
January 31, 2018: Campaign finance disclosures showed that McGrath raised $1.1 million in 2017 and Gray raised about $350,000.
December 5, 2017: Jim Gray announced that he was running for the seat.^[28]
August 1, 2017: Amy McGrath released her "Told Me," ad which, according to the Washington Post, turned her into a "national sensation."^[16]

Campaign finance

On May 2, the candidates disclosed the following campaign finance information:

Amy McGrath had raised more than $2 million and had more than $300,000 in cash on hand.
Jim Gray had raised more than $1.3 million and had nearly $440,000 in cash on hand.
Reggie Thomas had raised about $330,000 and had less than $15,000 in cash on hand.

On April 5, 2018, Jim Gray's campaign announced that he raised $790,000 in the first quarter of 2018 and $1.13 million since he began his campaign in December. McGrath's campaign later announced that she raised $587,000 in the first quarter and was at almost $1.7 million in total. Thomas raised about $61,000 in the first quarter and was at about $230,000 in total.^[29]

The table below contains data from FEC Quarterly January 2018 reports. It includes only candidates who have reported at least $10,000 in campaign contributions as of December 31, 2017.^[30]

Democrats

Satellite spending

With Honor Fund: This veterans organization that endorsed Amy McGrath disclosed $14,500 in spending opposing Jim Gray on May 7. From May 16-18, it spent more than $100,000 supporting McGrath.^[9]

Polls

See also: Ballotpedia's approach to covering polls

Kentucky 6th District Democratic Primary
Poll	Gray	McGrath	Thomas	Undecided	Other candidate	Margin of error	Sample size

Garin Hart Yang for Amy McGrath April 17-19, 2018	35%	42%	6%	14%	3%	+/-5.0	404
The Mellman Group for Jim Gray March 3-6, 2018	52%	19%	6%	23%	0%	+/-4.9	400
AVERAGES	43.5%	30.5%	6%	18.5%	1.5%	+/-4.95	402
Note: The polls above may not reflect all polls that have been conducted in this race. Those displayed are a random sampling chosen by Ballotpedia staff. If you would like to nominate another poll for inclusion in the table, send an email to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Endorsements

Ballotpedia tracks endorsements by organizations and elected officials. We located the following endorsements in this race. To notify us of other endorsements, please email us.

Democratic primary endorsements
Endorsement	Gray	McGrath	Thomas
Individuals
Nancy Jo Kemper, 2016 Democratic candidate for District 6^[31]			✔
Seth Moulton, U.S. representative from Massachusetts^[21]		✔
Kirsten Gillibrand, U.S. senator from New York^[32]		✔
Organizations
Lexington Herald-Leader^[33]	✔
United Steelworkers^[34]	✔
Victory Fund^[15]	✔
VoteVets PAC^[22]		✔
With Honor Fund^[35]		✔

How did the candidates differ?

According to the Washington Post, Jim Gray and Amy McGrath agreed on most issues: "To hear Gray and McGrath talk about issues is to hear echoing voices. Neither wants to go to Washington just to fight Trump; both see opportunities to work with him. Neither will commit to voting for Nancy Pelosi as House Democratic leader. Both are staunch defenders of the Affordable Care Act, though they stop short of embracing a single-payer health-care system."

Gray later said that he would not for Pelosi, while McGrath and Thomas said they were unsure.^[14]

The Post reported that the major difference between the candidates was how they frame their backgrounds. Gray emphasized his experience as Lexington's mayor, while McGrath focused on her military background and outsider status. She told the Post, “We cannot as Democrats keep pinning our hopes on older, rich, white guys to save us," and Democrats needed "people from all walks of life.”^[16]

Reggie Thomas, however, fell to the left of Gray and McGrath on issues like healthcare and gun policy. He argued for a Medicare-for-All program to replace the Affordable Care Act and a federal buyback program for owners of assault rifle-style weapons.^[36]

Campaign strategies and tactics

DCCC involvement

At issue in the primary was the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's (DCCC) support for Jim Gray over Amy McGrath.

Gray said that members of the DCCC encouraged him to run, but that he was not officially endorsed.^[16] He stepped into the race in December 2017, four months after McGrath released her "Told Me," ad which highlighted her military experience and, according to the Washington Post, turned her into a "national sensation."^[16]

Hastings Wyman of the Southern Political Report said that several factors made Gray a strong candidate to take on Barr in the general election. These included his family company's presence in the local economy, his personal wealth, and his defeat of U.S. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) in the 6th district during the state's 2016 U.S. Senate election. Gray received 51 percent of the vote in the district despite losing the state by nearly 15 points overall.^[4]

“Jim Gray is hardwired to win this district back for the Democrats,” said Dale Emmons, a Democratic political strategist allied with Gray.^[4]

McGrath's ties to district

Reggie Thomas criticized Amy McGrath for living outside of the district for 20 years and referred to her as a "carpetbagger" at a forum.

McGrath responded by saying that the 20 years she spent outside the district was when she served in the military and said she had always thought of Kentucky as her home.^[37]

On May 18, Jim Gray released an ad criticizing McGrath for not living in the district until 2017.

“This is not just an attack on me,” McGrath wrote on Facebook in response. “This is also an attack against any American citizen who chooses to serve their country in times of war and then come home to continue their service in another way.”^[38]

Campaign advertisements

Jim Gray

On May 18, Gray released an ad criticizing McGrath for not living in the district until 2017.^[38]

"Honor," released May 18, 2018

"Tanya," released May 5, 2018

"Stand," released April 25, 2018

"Pothole," released April 2, 2018

"Grayisms," released April 2, 2018

"Jim Gray for Congress" - Jim Gray campaign ad, released January 29, 2017

Amy McGrath

On April 2, 2018, McGrath announced that she was pulling her campaign ads from the television station WDKY-TV (Channel 56) because it was owned by Sinclair. Her announcement came after Deadspin produced a video showing news anchors from Sinclair-owned stations reading a script that questioned the authenticity of news reporting in some media outlets. McGrath said the script "eerily mimics the propaganda efforts that authoritarian regimes often use to control the media in their own country."

Sinclair called the script reading a "corporate news journalistic responsibility promotional campaign."

Jim Gray said he would not pull his ads from Sinclair-owned stations.

"Sinclair's approach is a disgrace to journalism, but we're not going to write people off just because of the TV shows they watch," Gray's campaign manager said. "If we cut and run, then the people trying to spread this garbage are the only ones doing the talking."^[39]

"General Bolden," released May 7, 2018

"Same Team," released April 17, 2018

"Toughest Mission," released April 3, 2018

"We'll See" - Amy McGrath campaign ad, released March 14, 2018

"A Few Minutes With Amy: Kentucky Derby" - Amy McGrath campaign ad, released January 11, 2018

"Runway" - Amy McGrath campaign ad, released August 18, 2017

"Told Me" - Amy McGrath campaign ad, released August 1, 2017

Reggie Thomas

"Minimum Wage" - Reggie Thomas campaign ad, released November 28, 2017

"We'll See" - Reggie Thomas campaign ad, released September 25, 2017

Campaign themes and policy stances

Jim Gray

Gray's campaign website stated the following:

“

#1: PROTECT AND FIX HEALTHCARE
Jim Gray will fight for all Kentuckians to have access to quality, affordable healthcare. The Affordable Care Act wasn’t perfect and needs to be improved, but we cannot go back to a time when the insurance companies called the shots and denied coverage for pre-existing conditions. There are bipartisan solutions to give families more options and keep costs down. Jim also believes women should continue to be in control of their healthcare decisions.

Opioids and other drugs are the modern plague that is bringing death and heartbreak to our families, friends, neighbors and affecting our communities as well. Too many lives have been lost to drug overdose, and it’s time for us to meet this crisis head-on. We must attack this issue from all sides, prevention, treatment and recovery, and attacking the supply. Substance abuse treatment and recovery is only possible through effective and ongoing care. Addiction is a disease, and we cannot treat this disease by putting those who are suffering in our already crowded prisons.

And Congress should either legalize medical marijuana for the entire country or get out of the way and let states decide how to regulate and tax cannabis. We have many critical care needs in this country, including treating opioid addiction and other serious ailments, and medical marijuana should be allowed for doctors to prescribe.

#2: IMPROVE OUR ECONOMY AND JOBS
Growing up in small town Kentucky, Jim Gray’s first jobs were cutting tobacco on the family farm and swinging a hammer at one of his father’s construction sites. It taught him there are no short cuts, but when you put in the work, you can do big things.

Because of his experience in business and as mayor, he understands that a job gives purpose and meaning to life, and outside of family, faith and health, a good job is one of the most important things in life.

That means our elected officials must focus on policies and programs that encourage job creation and opportunities to earn a better life, including: reducing income inequality through fair tax reform focused on helping working families, supporting efforts to raise the minimum wage to a living wage and leveling the playing field through initiatives like equal pay for equal work and paid leave.

America also has to encourage and make investments in our infrastructure. High speed internet is the 21st century’s connection to the global economy – much like rivers in the 18th century and railroads in the 19th and interstate highways in the 20th. Without it, we’re left behind. We also have to get serious about rebuilding our nation’s roads, bridges, ports and other critical infrastructure. We’ve been talking and talking – it’s time to get it done.

Through his own work in business and public service Jim understands the importance of supporting local businesses – big and small – to expand their local and international business. That translates into supporting trade agreements that are fair and promote Kentucky businesses and workers in agriculture, manufacturing, service sectors and more.

He also knows how important it is to fight for competition by making sure corporate acquisitions and mergers are not creating more monopolies in American business. Big telecom has a terrible record with customers in Lexington – rate hikes, poor customer service and outright dissatisfaction. Jim has worked for years to find a competitor for high speed internet and cable TV service – and did so in 2017. Congress needs to take deliberate action so customers are not stuck with little to no competition and state and local governments have no control to fix the problems the lack of competition creates.

And finally, our immigration system should be reformed in a way that is tough, practical and compassionate. The United States is a nation of immigrants. Republicans in Washington used to agree with that.

Jim supports a bipartisan solution that would increase security on our borders and restore the rule of law while still championing America’s role as a melting pot where hard-working immigrants can contribute to the American economy.

He also believes that DREAMers should be protected. They were brought to this country as children, they know no other home.

#3: FIGHT FOR WHAT IS RIGHTFULLY YOURS
Social Security and Medicare are programs you, your families and your neighbors pay into, and Jim will fight any effort by Washington politicians to cut those programs. We made a promise to our nation’s seniors through social security, and we ought to keep that promise. And they shouldn’t have to live in fear they will lose their Medicare benefits.

Jim believes Americans should have the right to vote, but some states have taken steps to make it harder for minorities and lower income people to vote.1 We should stop creating barriers to voting and promote participation. He is committed to defending the country and our elections from terrorists and foreign adversaries that want to spread chaos and threaten our way of life.

It’s also critically important to put a stop to the practice of unfair gerrymandering, and he would support efforts to ensure that districts are drawn fairly and people are well represented.

Jim stands up for equality, believing that all men and women were created equal and they should be treated that way, with opportunity and dignity for everyone.

As mayor, he led by example. Not only is he openly gay, as mayor he also ensured that his administration included a diverse group of people proportional to the demographic make-up of Lexington, including more than half of the mayor’s administration’s appointees are women. Jim also appointed the city’s first black fire chief in 2011, the first female fire chief in 2016 and the city’s second black chief of police this year.

Additionally, Jim worked with community leaders and the police to create and fund the policy that requires body cameras for police officers with emphasis to build trust in the community.

And at a time when nearly everything is digital, Jim will support returning to Net Neutrality and protecting internet privacy. Big companies shouldn’t be able to charge you more based on what websites you visit, content you look at, or platform you’re utilizing, and they certainly shouldn’t be slowing down service or playing favorites. The internet should be free and open to everyone, and Jim will work to ensure that it is run in a safe and fair manner, without allowing telecom lobbyist sand companies to pull the strings.

#4: IMPROVING EDUCATION AND AMERICA’S FUTURE
Jim knows a good job starts with a good education. He is a believer in supporting excellent teachers and strong public education.

Kentucky’s children should never have to view cost as a barrier to a quality education. Students need educational opportunities that address their specific learning needs and are not just tied to test scores. Whether they plan to enter the workforce after high school or go to college, our students should be able to view our educational systems as a path to pursue the careers of their dreams.

And Jim believes those careers shouldn’t start with mountains of student debt. One of the biggest problems facing our students is the rising cost of tuition and the fact that student loan debt actually exceeds credit card debt in America.1 We need to work to make a college education affordable for every American that wants one. We also owe it to those who have already graduated to help them manage and pay off their student loan debt.

From early childhood to adult education and workforce training, relevant and practical learning opportunities are essential to ensure that all Kentuckians succeed in work and life. That’s why Jim partnered with Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer to start an initiative to focus on expanding Kentucky’s manufacturing presence with an emphasis on workforce training to get workers ready for these good jobs. He will support making technical and workforce training investments a priority.

#5: STOP THE ATTACKS AGAINST OUR DEMOCRACY
National Security: It is critical we have leaders in Washington who will defend America from her enemies and protect American sovereignty, especially at the ballot box.

The U.S. must not shrink from its responsibilities and obligations in securing a more peaceful and engaged world community. And as we create opportunity here at home, we must continue our leadership in creating greater economic opportunity abroad.

Jim believes in smart and strong diplomacy that can support and strengthen our alliances, from efforts to fight global terrorism to strengthening emerging democracies to building greater prosperity among the community of nations.

Our government has no greater responsibility than to protect our citizens. Jim believes it is essential that we continue to work with long-time allies and partners across the globe to present a unified front against international threats, most pressingly the dangers presented by international terrorism.

Domestically, we’ve witnessed a rise in mass shootings – including the recent school shootings. Jim believes that it’s insane that Washington isn’t treating this like the crisis it is. He says we have to get real about the responsibilities that come with our rights because this cycle of insanity, where the once unthinkable becomes acceptable, is not what Americans deserve. It won’t stop unless we stop it.

Jim also believes big corporate money in campaigns and politics is destroying our Democracy. Getting this cash out of politics is a top priority and he supports a constitutional amendment that would end the Supreme Court’s disastrous Citizens United ruling.

Term limits for Congress are needed because Jim knows Kentuckians are fed up with Washington and career politicians like Andy Barr. Lexington has term limits for Mayor and the City Council, and Jim has seen that it works first hand.

Jim will work to end violence against women. We have seen too many troubling and mixed messages from Washington about how we approach violence against women. Public policy in American too often fails to protect women. Laws need to change to ensure women feel safe and equal in the workplace and at home.

Sexual assault on and off college campuses is a serious public health and safety issue as is domestic violence. Locally, Jim has supported non-profit organizations that do so much good work, but Congress can step up and do more.

#6: SUPPORT OUR TROOPS AND VETERANS
Both of Jim’s parents were World War II veterans. He knows how proud they were of their service to this country, and he is proud to support all those who served our country.

Jim believes we owe our active duty and reserve troops as well as our veterans enormous gratitude. It’s a requirement to show them support during their service and after which means ensuring they get the benefits and care they earned.

Supporting and fixing problems in the Veterans Administration (VA) system is a top priority. Jim believes no veteran should have to wait for the care they need. But we shouldn’t allow this as an excuse to impose an extreme agenda and privatize the entire VA.

Veterans’ mental health and suicide prevention initiatives are critical because risk for suicide is higher for veterans than civilians. This is a crisis, and they need Congressional support for a smooth transition from active duty to the civilian world.1

Jim fully supports federal efforts to help veterans find work when they return to civilian life. As Mayor, Jim has managed similar efforts to connect those in need with service providers’ placement services so they can get back on their feet and live independent and happy lives.

#7: BEAT ANDY BARR AND SEND SOME ADULT SUPERVISION TO WASHINGTON
It’s time we send Washington and Wall Street a message: Andy Barr’s time is up; the people of Kentucky want their seat back.

Washington is broken. The nation is in crisis, and members of Congress are only worried about their donors and themselves. We can do better.

One party is controlling Washington today, and they’ve made their agenda perfectly clear: cut healthcare, give irresponsible tax breaks to their wealthy donors and further divide America.

Andy Barr lacks the courage to stand up for what’s right, and it’s time to send him packing.

It’s time for an independent Kentucky voice in Washington; a voice that stands up for Kentuckians and not special interests. Our leaders must have the guts to lead when evil rears its head – whether it’s sexism, racism, domestic violence or school shootings.

Enough is enough. D.C. could use some adult supervision.

Jim Gray’s experience and record of getting results put him in a unique position to win in November. Gray beat Rand Paul, an incumbent U.S. Senator, in our district in 2016. Jim earned 31,000 more votes than the last time a Democrat held this congressional seat in 2012, and Gray outperformed the 2012 and 2016 Democratic Presidential tickets by 41,000 votes.1 Jim did it with strong support in our counties, towns and cities across the district.

To win in 2018, it will take a candidate who cares about people and fights for policies that will get America back on track. But winning also requires local support, trust and a candidate who can earn the same strong support Jim Gray was able to achieve in 2016.

^[40]

”

—Jim Gray for Congress^[41]

Amy McGrath

McGrath's campaign website stated the following:

“

Health care
I believe strongly that basic health care is a fundamental right that should be guaranteed for every American. Similar to our guarantees of a basic education to every child born, health care is an issue that affects us as a nation, and it's a moral issue for me as a daughter of one of the first women to graduate from the University of Kentucky medical school in the 1960s.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) is far from perfect, but it did enable many Kentuckians, especially those with pre-existing conditions, to acquire affordable health insurance for the first time. As a result, the uninsured rate in Kentucky dropped from over 20% to barely 5%. That’s nowhere near “failing,” as the Republican Party and President Trump continue to claim.

But the GOP campaigned on the dishonest notion that the ACA was in a "death spiral" and they had something better and cheaper to “replace” it: Trust them.

We all know now, that was a lie.

The House bill that my Republican opponent, Andy Barr, said he would “enthusiastically vote for” would have thrown 23 million Americans off health coverage. Overwhelmingly, doctors, nurses, and healthcare organizations in America have opposed each of the Republican bills this year. Their efforts would especially hurt veterans, where 1 in 10 use Medicaid, and mental health conditions like PTSD would be considered a preexisting condition. The American Medical Association not only opposed the GOP efforts, but went so far as to say it violated their medical standard of “do no harm!”

Ironically, the “repeal and replace” effort is also terrible for jobs. Under Senator McConnell’s original Senate bill, Kentucky would have experienced a net loss of 231,400 jobs, all of this so that the wealthiest Americans could have another massive tax cut. The GOP has been unapologetically trying to revert back to a time when people would have to mortgage their homes if they got sick.

Insurance
That said, we have to be honest that the ACA falls short of the change we really need. My mother was a practicing doctor for 40 years and I continually saw her frustration with the power and control of insurance companies, and with rising costs. We can do better in this country.

I believe firmly that the goal must be universal coverage for all Americans. But we need an honest and meaningful debate over how to get there.

I side firmly with former Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear, the man who implemented the ACA in a manner that made Kentucky the gold standard among states as far as how it’s supposed to work. Beshear said recently, “If we were starting from scratch, I would be for single-payer, too…. But we aren’t starting from scratch. There are too many stakeholders to be able to sweep them away and begin all over again.” In fact, currently proposed single-payer legislation would represent such a sweeping overhaul that it would put our healthcare system into massive upheaval. I do not support such an approach.

Perhaps it’s the military officer in me that takes a more pragmatic approach on this issue. Every major piece of legislation in our country has needed fixes along the way: Social Security and Medicare were not created perfect. We have expanded opportunities and overcome challenges in every generation. In each case, Americans didn’t quit because we didn’t have every answer to start with; instead, we redoubled our efforts, worked together, and found ways around problems and obstacles. That is the American way. We don’t simply throw things away that we believe are imperfect. We work over time – in the words of the Constitution itself – to make them “more perfect.”

So, I remain committed to working in a bipartisan way to fix the problems with the Affordable Care Act, which brought down Kentucky's uninsured rate in a dramatic way. But any fixes must maintain current essential health benefits without allowing states to waive them, not impose any annual or lifetime coverage caps, and must continue the ACA’s prohibition against insurers charging higher premiums based on factors such as health status or pre-existing conditions.

The voters expect us to put aside our partisan differences and work together to address rising premiums and deductibles, while maintaining the current guarantees for pre-existing conditions. This is critical. In the military, we don't care whether you're a Democrat or a Republican when it comes to completing our mission. I will bring that same sense of purpose to Congress, when elected.

I favor approaches to bridge some of the single-payer/Obamacare divide, and begin a longer process that may take us in that general direction. Here are some steps we can take:

Medicare buy-in
I support a Medicare buy-in option for those over the age of 55. This is smart public policy.

The health care debate has been especially frightening for middle aged Americans who have not reached Medicare age. Faced with the skyrocketing premiums that the reckless GOP plans would impose, older Americans too often must confront an impossible choice: spending a large chunk of the retirement nest egg to purchase coverage, or go without coverage and pray nothing happens until they reach 65 and can join Medicare.

A Medicare buy-in would provide some peace of mind for the more vulnerable Americans who have some of the greatest, and most expensive, health care needs. And taking some middle aged Americans out of the risk pool would help greatly lower premiums for those under 55.

Public option
Meanwhile, with some people still unable to afford coverage, and many more paying too much for the coverage they do have, I believe we must increase competition among existing carriers.

That’s why I also support a so-called “public option” to create a government-run health insurance agency that would compete with other private health insurance companies within the country. A major reason for a public option — beyond the effect of generally lowering premiums since government would not be trying to make a profit — would be to guarantee that in those counties with just one or two insurers, rates could not be artificially spiked because of lack of competition. Plus, this gives people more choice in the health insurance market. No one would be forced to go with the government-run plan, but it would be there if Americans wished to choose it.

It is worth remembering that both the public option and the Medicare buy-in were initially part of the Affordable Care Act, but were removed because of the threat of a filibuster. To improve Obamacare, we need to return to this original conception.

Foreign policy
“The most essential quality for leadership is not perfection, but credibility. People must be able to believe you.”

As a former military officer, protecting America was the business I lived in my entire adult life. Today, we face many global challenges that require us to have leaders who clearly understand the nature of our changing world.

American values
Our foreign policy must be directly linked to our interests, which are defined by our American values. Our role in the world is unique and we must strive to be the champion of democratic movements, human rights (including women’s rights), justice, equality, opportunity, and freedoms of speech, religion and press. I fear our current President does not respect the values that tie us to our closest allies and partners and the significance of America being the “shining city on a hill.” After fighting for my country and representing America around the globe, I do understand this significance and I will constantly push to bring our American values back into our foreign policy.

Changing global environment
We must have leaders who understand how the world environment is changing and how it will affect our security.

Economic power is shifting from West to the East. Nations in the East like China, will have more money for its military and more power. World population demographics are rapidly changing. Western nations are becoming older. A youth bulge in developing nations, along with rapid urbanization in many parts of the globe, will create many ungoverned spaces that become the breeding ground for jihadist radicalism and crime and will be the platforms for future attacks on the United States. Non-state actors will use the rise of technology to proliferate their ideology and to physically attack our networks. Furthermore, non-state actors could potentially attack our allies, and us, using new weapons we are only imagining today. We need to maintain a strong military and a strong diplomatic and development corps.

Climate change is a national security issue. Climate change and resource scarcity is with us today. It’s not a theory, it’s a fact. For some reason, my opponent, and the Republican Party in general, have concluded this might be just a Chinese hoax. It’s not. Scientists around the world know it, and the United States military recognizes what science says and it is already testing, adapting, researching how to operate and succeed in these rapidly changing environments.

We are seeing the effects of it now: The Earth is getting warmer. Last summer was the hottest in history and 8 of the last 10 summers were the hottest in history. Sea levels are rising. This will not only affect massive numbers of people who live on the world’s coastlines, but this will affect our national security potentially more than any other factor.

Our naval bases around the globe are seeing the effects now. Ten times a year, floods cripple our Norfolk Naval Base. Key West Naval Air Station (where I learned to dogfight in the F/A-18) will be almost completely under water in the next 70 years. Weather patterns are changing. We are seeing hurricanes, floods, and fires in ways we’ve never seen before. Large parts of the world (Middle East, Africa, Southeast Asia) are seeing dramatic desertification at an alarming rate. This means less food will be produced and large movements (migrations) of people will be forced out of the lands they occupy today. In the 20th century, we fought wars over values or economic clashes. In the 21st century, it will be over water and resources.

This is the world we will live in. This is the world our children and grandchildren will face. We can’t afford to be isolationist. We can’t afford to look other way, and we can’t afford to keep denying this challenge exists. This is the world's future and we have to adapt! We must lead the world in planning for the effects of climate change and working hard to mitigate them.

This should not be a political issue. This is an American issue and a global issue. We need leaders that get it.

NATO
“NATO isn’t the partner of last resort…it’s the partner of first resort.”

The world has seen many failed alliances (League of Nations, Warsaw Pact) – but NATO isn’t one of them… yet. I’ve worked with these nations during my deployments. NATO has only invoked Article 5 once and that was when the alliance stood with us after the attacks of September 11, 2001. They were all right there with us, in tents in Afghanistan, and we need to be there for them.

We live in an interconnected world, where a fruit vendor in Tunisia can start an uprising in an entire region! We need strong alliances to face the global challenges ahead, and NATO is the most capable alliance in world history. It’s critical because it’s values-based. Freedom, democracy, rule of law, and liberty are pillars of the organization.

NATO isn’t a business deal. It’s not about shared business interests, profit, and power. It’s about shared VALUES, and that’s what makes it so strong and powerful.

ISIL/ISIS and radical jihadist extremism
The growing threat of Salafi jihadist extremism is the fight I lived in for over a decade. Guns and bombs alone will not win this struggle. “Killing more terrorists” will not win this struggle. Inciting hate will not win this struggle. We have to be strategic. We cannot defeat ISIS and Islamic extremism until we defeat the idea of ISIS. Though we will not lose tactically on the battlefield, we must improve in our strategic communications.

This will be a long-term fight, and one where we must be patient. We cannot give them propaganda like President Trump’s Muslim Ban, which is fueling the jihadists’ rhetoric of the United States waging war on Islam. Every time US leadership makes strategic errors like this, ISIS gains more recruits for its cause, crushing our hard fought tactical gains on the battlefield. Ultimately, ISIS and the jihadist groups are a symptom of something larger: the deterioration of the human condition in many parts of the world today.

The only way to realistically counteract ISIS, and jihadist groups, is a combination of force and helping areas that are the breeding ground for jihadism. Helping means pressing states and leaders to develop the institutions and mechanisms that develop good governance, electoral legitimacy, and anything that broadens who is allowed political power and voice.

Furthermore, we must push for sustainable political solutions in places like Syria and Iraq. The full, and even greater funding of the US State Department, USAID, and development non-governmental organizations (NGO), is as important to our national security than simply a strong military. These agencies of our government must be equipped to partner with local actors to turn populations against extremism and build stronger deradicalization programs. That's the only thing that will turn the tide against jihadist groups. It will not happen with force alone, and it will not work simply by throwing money at local populations. We have to build the local capacity strategically, and this is something that USAID and State know how to do.

My opponent, who is on the House Financial Services Committee, voted to withhold funding for important institutions such as the World Bank that help development in Middle East countries. Actions like this show that many in Congress do not understand the strategic nature of the fight we are engaged in. Wars are expensive. Combating terrorism from failed states is expensive. Foreign development aid is the “cheapest insurance policy” we can buy as a country. I’m in full agreement with Secretary of Defense (and former General) James Mattis when he says, if we cut foreign aid, then we need to “buy more ammunition.”

(Read my published thoughts on preventative war and the Iraq invasion of 2003: [1])

Afghanistan
Despite what the current President has promised, we will never achieve any lasting success in Afghanistan unless we can help make Afghanistan’s government function better. Afghanistan will not be turned into a Jeffersonian democracy, but we can define success by simultaneously protecting the American homeland and expanding the Afghan government’s capacity. We can do that with a small presence in Afghanistan for a few continued years.

However, we need leaders with a robust understanding of this conflict who will push the Administration to utilize other government agencies, not just military. If there is one takeaway I’ve gained after fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq in multiple combat deployments, it’s this: the military cannot “win” this alone. It’s going to require various elements of national power, some of which have been vastly underfunded in recent years (diplomacy, development agencies) by members in Congress who haven’t a clue about the nature of the threats we face today.

Iran
Iran and its Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps continue to be the largest destabilizing influence in Middle East today. Additionally, Iran was on its way to developing a nuclear weapon over the past decade and a half before the last administration’s attempts to halt Iran’s progress. There are lots of opinions on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the so-called “Iran deal”. After completing the 3-year Program for Emerging Leaders at the Center for the Study of Weapons of Mass Destruction (National Defense University) and teaching a course on WMD at the US Naval Academy, I’ve studied the deal quite a bit.

The US along with the rest of the world (specifically the UK, France, China, Russia, and Germany) successfully negotiated with Iran to constrain its growing nuclear program. Recently, our Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Dunford, said Iran is in compliance with its obligations under the deal, and Secretary of Defense Mattis has indicated that pulling out of the deal would not be in our interests. I am in full agreement with both.

The deal sharply constrains Iran’s nuclear program and provides for strict inspections that the international community has never been granted before. The best way to ensure a nation does not have nuclear weapon capability is through inspections. If the “Iran deal” goes away, the inspections will go away and we will have no way of knowing the extent of Iran’s nuclear capability. Additionally, the rest of the world will not reinstate sanctions if the US unilaterally pulls out.

Pulling out would be a loss for us on all fronts. Iran would get its economy back and be able to develop a nuclear weapon, while we would lose all of our credibility in seeking a diplomatic resolution to other conflicts such as the current North Korea nuclear crisis.

Bottom line: Diplomacy avoided another war in the Middle East and averted the kind of crisis we now face with North Korea. It’s working. Let’s not throw it away.

Israel
After having operated in the Middle East for many years as a US Marine, I’ve grown to appreciate the unique security requirements of our closest ally in the region, Israel.

I had the opportunity to spend the summer of 2015 in Israel leading a group of American cadets and midshipmen traveling with the IDF (Israeli Defense Force) to gain a further understanding of the region. The survival and security of Israel is in the United States’ interest and a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is fundamental to Israel’s security. Additionally, I’m in full support of maintaining Israel’s QME (Qualitative Military Edge) and strengthening our nation’s special relationship based on shared values.

North Korea
Kim Jong-un has promised to build an ICBM with nuclear warhead capability to hit the US. Everyday we see him getting closer and closer to fulfilling that promise. It has been like this since President George W. Bush.

So, how do we handle it? Carefully, deliberately, and with all elements of national power.

We know Kim Jong-un is a cruel leader, but there is no evidence that he is suicidal, or cannot be deterred. His quest for nuclear weapons is spurred by one thing, the survival of his regime. We must recognize that North Korea has possessed formidable conventional, chemical, and biological capabilities for decades without using them. Kim knows that any large conflict would wipe his regime out, making it highly unlikely that he would start one. We shouldn’t either. A preventative war would be a disaster given the millions of innocent people (including thousands of Americans) who would be killed in South Korea and Japan. We need to be very deliberate and careful when dealing with this nuclear regime.

Our President prides himself on his unpredictability in foreign policy. Unpredictability between nuclear weapon capable states is extremely destabilizing. The President’s rhetoric and tweets are immensely dangerous to the well being of our people and our country.

The US has other options between doing nothing and all out war. We could use our offensive cyber capabilities to degrade North Korea’s nuclear arsenal, increase our missile defense capabilities in the region, or even coordinate a naval blockade to put an even tougher economic squeeze on the regime. No matter what we do, we should do it with the cooperation of our partners and allies as well as with the cooperation of China and Russia. China certainly does not wish to see a war on the Korean peninsula either. It is critical that the approach to North Korean nuclear progress should be a rest of the world vs. North Korea, not just a US vs. North Korea. World sanctions against Iran worked because they were not unilateral. We need the same multi-national approach here.

Russia
Our Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has testified that Russia is the greatest threat to American security. Russia poses an existential threat to the United States due to its nuclear weapons and its behavior in the past several years has been disturbing. Russia’s aggression in Georgia, Crimea, Ukraine, and Syria has been alarming. It’s becoming more assertive in the Arctic, likely the most important geostrategic zone of competition in the coming decades. The US should consider providing defensive arms to Ukraine and exerting more pressure on Moscow using economic sanctions. Additionally, we know that Russia tried to undermine one of our greatest treasures, that of our democratic process itself.

Right now, we need a 9/11-style commission to find out and address the extent of Russian involvement in the 2016 elections. This was an attack within our borders on the very linchpin of our democratic stability, and Russia will try it again. We need to know what happened, how and why it happened, and call it out with a response. As an American, I’m extremely disappointed the Republican majority in Congress has failed to address this national security threat.

Remember, we had 33 Congressional hearings exhausting all aspects of the Benghazi disaster in Libya. Where is the same emphasis to investigate this attack and our failure as a nation at defending against it? Our current administration is failing to take this threat seriously (for obvious reasons). It's Congress’ job to stand up, take action here when the President is unwilling to protect our American democratic elections.

China
China has been rapidly expanding its military. It has been adding to its Navy by 15 percent each year and expanding into the deep Pacific. It has aggressively built bases on islands and claimed parts of the South China Sea against international law in its quest for more natural resources. Here again, its critical that the US work with our allies and partners in the region to counter China’s advances and ensure the region remains democratically and human rights oriented.

At the same time, the US has a special interrelated economic relationship with China. We also need to work with China to stem North Korea’s nuclear weapon progress. When the current administration pulled out of the strategic partnership of the TPP, the US lost influence in the Pacific. If the United States is pushed out of Asia (which is what China would want), we would lose our influence in that crucial part of the world. China would gain more power, trade will be harder, we might not be in a position to respond should a major development occur.

Sexual harassment
Let’s talk about sexual harassment. It's such an important, and long overdue conversation for us to have as a nation.

First, we cannot let it become a partisan issue. Otherwise, it will become a political football and never be dealt with by our society, and we lose a crucial opportunity for meaningful reckoning, healing, and education. This affliction doesn’t fall along partisan lines — Roy Moore, John Conyers, Harvey Weinstein, Charlie Rose, Al Franken, Donald Trump, and the list goes on.

All inappropriate physical harassment perpetrated by those in power upon women (or men) is wrong and cannot be tolerated, and predatory behavior towards children/teenagers, as is alleged in Alabama regarding Roy Moore, should be treated for what it is — outright child molestation.

This cultural shift may well represent a watershed moment. It is likely that more women will speak out against prominent political and establishment figures, and they should. We've come to learn that predatory behavior doesn’t typically happen just once. When the first courageous person decides to speak out, we have to expect that more will follow and what we have been ignoring in our workplaces and professions for some time will begin to surface. We have to resist the natural impulse to give the benefit of the doubt for those we tend to like, but not those on the other side. Bad behavior by Democrats should not be viewed as less detrimental to us than by those we disagree with politically.

We had (and continue to have) this problem in our military. I lived through times in my career where the culture was such that speaking out was certainly not in the best interest of one's career. Be silent, look the other way, don't cause waves, brush it off...these were all coping mechanisms for many women in the military. But the military has made strides in this area and I could see a real positive difference during my 24-year career.

In my experience, the very best way to combat this type of behavior is for leaders to foster an environment of respect for all, and one where anyone can feel like he/she can come forward (without repercussion) should there be sexual harassment or assault. That means leaders must make known their expectations that the behavior will never be tolerated nor covered up, and of course follow through with it (even when the perpetrator is someone high ranking or well known to the leader).

Also, it was only when women began to rise in the officer and enlisted ranks that the systemic harassment and hazing began to subside in the units that had women. When the military ranks were largely an all-boys club, this behavior went largely unchecked. It was the promotion of more senior women officers and senior enlisted that made a difference. That's an incredibly important lesson. When we see more women in places like corporate board rooms and elected to office, it will be harder to get away with abusive behavior.

Finally, we have to look out for each other, regardless of gender. Each of us (men and women) can make a real difference when we stand up, say something, and refuse to look the other way. Often, it takes only one person to intervene. When the perpetrator is the person in power, we have to foster a society where people can come forward and hold their leaders publicly accountable too. That’s what we all need to do here.

Medical marijuana & legalization
Many veterans suffering from chronic pain and PTSD report improved healthcare outcomes from medical cannabis and I’m proud to stand with the American Legion in calling for the removal of cannabis as a Schedule 1 drug.

I also strongly believe that we need more research into its efficacy in treating these ailments that veterans, and others, face. It may also alleviate some of the dependence on opioids for pain relief and that, alone, is a meaningful reason to consider moving in that direction.

On the issue of full legalization, I’d like to see our government permit full research on the subject. The Schedule 1 classification means that we can’t even conduct studies on the effect of legalization. Perhaps it’s the military officer in me, but I’m all about thoughtful planning and research before diving head first into fully opening that door.

But I hope the state — and the federal government — begin to relax its unnecessarily rigid position on medical cannabis.

Guns
[Updated on February 19, 2018]

Over the past few months, I've been asked a few times about whether I would ever seek the NRA's endorsement or accept campaign contributions from them?

The answer is No.

Arguably, the greatest barrier to making progress on so many issues comes down to the power of the special interests, and the greater opportunity for making money, the greater the influence of their campaign money on our elected officials. Think about what the oil and gas industry has done to efforts to tackle climate change, or the power of Big Pharma on drug prices. The gun lobby (primarily the NRA) is arguably the most powerful of all special interests. In the early 2000s, I was actually an NRA member for a period of time. Back then, the NRA was about gun owners. Today, it has morphed into a lobbying group for commercial gun manufacturers. I don't recognize the current version of the group.

The gun lobby's mere ability to stifle any reasonable efforts towards tackling the epidemic of gun violence is the greatest obstacle we face in dealing with gun safety and strong policing of existing laws. When it is able to maintain a 22-year federal ban on agencies like the CDC using funds to study the problem from a public health standpoint, it is preventing us from even having an informed starting point for discussions, and last year's sabotaging of bipartisan legislation to improve the gun-sale background check system — right after two horrific mass shootings (Las Vegas and the Texas church massacre) — should remind us that this is as much Congress' fault as it is the deranged mass killers who use the weapons.

For example, federal law requires you to be 21 to purchase a handgun, but in many states anyone 18 or older can buy the AR-15, a semi-automatic version of the military’s M16, on which I was trained. That means a 19-year-old can’t buy a beer and can’t buy a handgun, but can buy an assault weapon.

As a nation, we desperately need to have a conversation about guns where we bring to the table the concerns of both those in the cities as well as the rural areas. Beyond the common sense measures that should have been enacted long ago that even gun owners support (background checks for private sales and gun shows, barring purchases from anyone on no-fly or watch lists, meaningful efforts to keep guns out of the hands of felons, domestic abusers, and the mentally ill, and funding our CDC and NIH to study the epidemic as it does every other scourge), we need a honest conversation about what are willing to tolerate as a nation.

When do we discuss who should have access to what are essentially weapons of war (like the AR-15)? Or high-capacity magazines? What about the value of a federal database of gun sales, or a broader discussion about concealed carry? Or an analysis of the benefits and costs to mandatory liability insurance, like we do most other things that we own that can injure others?

We need to have an adult conversation as a nation, and we must have input from people with different points of view — without the gun lobby dictating the terms. But it's time for all of us to come to the table and talk it through. We simply can't do that as long as the gun lobby continues to buy off politicians.

We also need members of Congress who have some credibility from both sides of this debate, haven't sold their political soul to the special interests in advance, and who respect rural culture and its unique relationship on this issue.

[Posted on October 6, 2017]

I fear that if a mass gun killing of school kids at Sandy Hook Elementary won’t spark an honest national dialogue about guns, then I don't know what will. As a gun owner, I very much respect the constitutional issues at stake. They're important. But as a mother of three young children, I am terrified by our unwillingness to deal with gun violence, both the mass shootings and the thousands killed by handguns in our cities each year.

I'm not going to suggest there are easy fixes to these protracted issues. Even if you stopped mass shootings, what about all the handgun violence? Lawful gun owners shouldn't be penalized for the actions of bad or ill people. But this is an American problem, not that of a single political party, and it requires us to sit down together to find solutions where everyone must give a little from their preferred position. Otherwise, we let the fringes dictate the terms of this debate, and everyone loses — except them.

We should begin with the items that have overwhelming public support: tighten enforcement when it comes to preventing the mentally ill from purchasing any weapons, bar purchases by people on no-fly or terror watch lists, and if you have to undergo a background check at a licensed gun dealer (as I have), you should not be able to evade that by obtaining a weapon at gun shows or privately. Otherwise, background checks are worthless. I also support current efforts to restrict alterations on firearms to get around federal restrictions, like bump stock.

Beyond those initial measures, we need our leaders to show allegiance to the voters, not to special interests, and sit down and work together on long-term solutions. This is not going to be solved overnight.

Money in politics
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. -Abraham Lincoln

The corrosive influence of big money is slowly destroying the democracy our Founders intended. Big money drives lawmakers to cower to special interests, and mutes the conversations needed for public good.

Citizens United was one of the worst Supreme Court decisions in modern history.

The Court’s decision allows a tidal wave of unlimited and undisclosed donations by corporations under the guise of “free speech.” The Court wrongly believed that a company’s million-dollar campaign donation would not dictate the policy decisions of elected officials.

This terrible decision effectively allows an election to be bought. How? By corporations, wealthy individuals, and foreign entities like Russia sinking millions of dollars in the form of countless ads promoting or attacking a candidate to sway voters. The donors lack of “connection” to a campaign allows them to dodge taking responsibility for their “free speech” even if that speech is 100% lies. All the while, American voters may never find out that their election had been heavily influenced by a corporate or foreign agenda.

Damage to democracy
Just half of one percent — 0.50% — of Americans fund almost 70% of congressional campaigns.

Think about that for a second. That’s staggering. The question is, what does this do to our democracy? I see three major effects.

First, large undisclosed, unlimited corporate donations directly undermine the wants and needs of the people. Because of these donations, special interests groups have an enormous influence over politicians at the expense of real people. This means higher prescription drugs, lower wages, weak consumer protection - the list goes on and on.

Second, big money forces members of Congress to constantly raise more money for their next campaign. They spend 70% of their time fundraising. The person you elected to represent you, to understand the issues, to meet with you, to attend hearings in overseeing the executive branch (as per the Constitution of the US), and the person who is paid $174,000 to do so, is only spending 30% of his or her working time actually working for you!

Third, elected offices are held mostly by those who cave to special interests or are millionaires themselves. The cost of political campaigns has skyrocketed in the past two decades. In 2000, the average House campaign cost just under $700,000. In 2016, it was $1.5 million. This makes running for office almost completely out of reach for anyone who is not a millionaire, does not come from a family of politics, and/or is not bought by special interests.

My race
I see this in my own race for Kentucky’s 6th district.

The incumbent Republican congressman gets 97% of his campaign money from special interests, corporations, and large donors, including a staggering $796,171 from the Financial, Insurance, and Real Estate industries in the 2016 cycle alone — three of the largest interest groups. Only 3% of his donations, since he was elected to Congress in 2012, have come from individual donors who gave less than $200.

Meanwhile, one of my main Democratic primary challengers is a multi-millionaire who can simply write a personal check to cover his campaign expenses, as he has in his past campaigns.

Both are establishment politicians who don’t need or seek small donations in significant numbers. In other words, neither need regular people to fund their campaigns.

In contrast, after just 5 months in the race, my campaign had 16,000 donors, of which nearly 13,000 gave $50 or less, and half of the overall money we have raised have come from small donors. That’s democracy speaking. We need to get back to that.

Curing the corrosive effects of money
Now, how can we cure this cancer crippling our democracy?

1. We must hold our elected officials accountable for succumbing to these special interest groups. It is their responsibility to act in the interest of their constituents not corporations.

2. Elect leaders who believe money in politics to be a major issue, and elect leaders who campaign with the help of the people, not corporate interests.

3. A Constitutional amendment to reign in money in politics, even though such an amendment is unlikely today. As a member of Congress, I will work to pass campaign finance reform every chance I can. But passing any law at the federal level will be challenged in court and that means Citizens United must be overturned. To do that requires a Supreme Court that is more progressive. This is one of the major reasons why who we elect as President is critical.

4. Until we can overturn the harmful Citizens United ruling, we must express support for legislation that piece-by-piece dismantles the some of the ramifications of the ruling. Specifically, here are several items moving through the House of Representatives that are working today to remove big money from politics. I pledge to support them if I am elected to Congress:

DISCLOSE Act (H.R. 1134): The DISCLOSE Act would require “dark money” groups, such as 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations and 501 (c)(6) organizations to disclose their donors and spending when they engage in any political activity that mentions a candidate for federal office and/or is intended to influence a federal election.

KOCH Act (H.R.1439): The Keeping Our Campaigns Honest (KOCH) Act would require the FCC to demand that outside political groups (dark money organizations) disclose the names of their major donors funding political ads.

Government By The People Act (H.R. 20): The Government By The People Act would grant voters a voucher worth up to $50 (through a tax credit) for campaign contributions, and it would provide a six-to-one federal match. This would incentivize candidates to seek widespread small-dollar funding for their campaigns.

Get Foreign Money Out of US Elections Act (H.R. 1615): The Get Foreign Money Out of US Elections Act would expand the current ban on campaign contributions and independent expenditures by foreign nationals to include foreign-owned and controlled domestic corporations.

In the meantime, I will continue to do everything I can to heighten awareness of this issue and increase awareness on laws that counter the excessive money in our political campaigns.

This is a solvable problem, and is not a partisan issue. Fixing it will require citizens and politicians alike who love our country and demand structural reform before our democracy is destroyed.

Climate change
Climate change isn’t a theory. It’s a fact.

And it’s not just scientists around the world who know it. The United States military recognizes it – and realizes that it poses a serious challenge to our national security. That’s why our military is already testing, researching, and adapting operations to succeed in these rapidly changing environments.

A changing climate has had and will continue to have hugely disruptive effects not only on the environment, but also on migration patterns, economies, disease vectors, and political unrest around the world. All of these dramatically affect our country’s safety, security and well-being.

We are already experiencing these effects: The Earth is getting warmer. Eight of the last ten summers have each been the hottest in history, and last summer was the hottest ever recorded. Sea levels are rising. This will affect massive numbers of people who live on the world’s coastlines, creating climate refugees, economic challenges, epidemics and pandemics, and geopolitical upheavals on a scale never before seen. Climate change is coming and we can’t afford to look the other way.

Our naval bases around the globe are seeing the consequences now. Ten times a year, floods cripple our Norfolk Naval Base. Key West Naval Air Station – where I learned to air-to-air dogfight in the F/A-18 – will be almost completely under water in the next 70 years. Weather patterns are creating hurricanes, floods, and fires in ways we’ve never seen before and that will both affect and in some cases demand military responses.

Large parts of the world, including the Middle East, Africa, and Southeast Asia, are undergoing dramatic desertification at an alarming rate, meaning less food will be produced and large migrations will occur as people will be forced out of the lands they occupy today. In the 20th century, we fought wars over values or economic conflicts; in the 21st century, it will be over food, water and resources.

Another reason climate change is a national security concern is its huge impact on our economy. Rising sea levels will alter global shipping patterns, severe weather will affect the ability of goods to be produced and transported, and markets, particularly for energy, are shifting as nations work to address and mitigate these changes.

All of this is why the Trump Administration’s decision to slash research on sustainable, clean sources of energy is so wrong-headed and concerns me – and should concern every patriotic American.

Both from a security and an economic standpoint, we need to invest in renewable energy. Our military is already one of the biggest proponents of renewable energy research. Why? Because it saves lives – and makes more strategic sense – if forward operating bases overseas do not have to be constantly refueled with traditional forms of energy like petroleum, which require vulnerable ground supply lines and are subject to potentially volatile markets.

Both militarily and economically, the US must be a world leader in renewables investment or we will cede the future energy industry – and our national security – to China, which is developing in this area at a rapid pace.

America should be leading the world in responding to climate change, not running away. The Paris Climate Accords is a global agreement to recognize climate change and pursue a call to action to mitigate its detrimental effects. When President Trump pulled out of the agreement, he not only made an irresponsible move given the trajectory of the global climate, but also severely lessened our power in world leadership. He signified a lack of responsibility and seriousness in protecting our world.

Simply put, “America first” doesn’t work regarding climate change because we don’t live in a bubble. By removing ourselves from the Paris Agreement, we not only turn our back on the rest of the world, but we are turning our back on our own people. We owe it to our fellow Americans to take every measure possible in mitigating the effects of climate change.

But renewable energy research isn’t just something we need to do to respond to a threat – whether security, economic, or environmental – it’s something we should invest in as an opportunity. Renewable energy is both cleaner and more economical in the long-run, and that’s why it has tremendous potential for economic growth and job opportunities across America.

This is especially true for Kentucky. As I discuss in detail in my forthcoming economic plan, Kentucky’s energy future need not be an either/or choice between coal and sustainable sources. We can provide support for our coal communities and boost coal consumption here in Kentucky by using local coal-generated electricity for electric vehicles while we work to transition the energy infrastructure and expertise that we already have to renewables like wind and solar.

Furthermore, renewable energy represents an opportunity not a threat for our state: Kentucky can become a leader in expanding solar and wind production, which will both reduce electricity costs for our families and bring energy-related jobs back to Central Kentucky. We can achieve this in part by leveraging our military bases as national hubs for renewables research, and expanding – not cutting – federal investment in this research.

Because of our location, Central Kentucky can also continue to be a leader in the budding logistics industry by investing in needed electric-vehicle infrastructure, which will itself help produce additional jobs in vehicle manufacturing and energy provision. Such strategies will help contribute to the mitigation of climate change – but they, just as importantly, will help grow our economy and create jobs: not jobs somewhere far away, jobs right here in Kentucky.

In sum, we have the tools right here in Central Kentucky to be leaders not only in the coal economy of the 20th Century, but also in the renewable energy economy of the 21st Century. Renewables research is an opportunity for Kentucky, and we need someone to go to Washington and fight so that when the future economy comes, our district will be its home, just as it was for the energy economy of the past.

The environment shouldn’t be a partisan, political issue. This is a global issue, an American issue, and an issue for Kentucky. It’s about the future of our planet for our children and generations to come. We need leaders that get it. ^[40]

”

—Amy McGrath for Congress^[42]

Reggie Thomas

Thomas' campaign website stated the following:

“

HEALTHCARE
The Commonwealth of Kentucky has some of the worst healthcare numbers in the country.

We have the highest rate of deaths from cancer in the nation. Kentucky’s numbers are almost 30% higher than the national average, and in some counties, in the 6th district, it is nearly 50% higher.

We have a congressman who time and time again has sided with insurance companies… and who has voted to kick over half a million Kentuckians off their health insurance.

More will lose access to health insurance because they have pre-existing conditions. “Pre-existing condition” it is not just a fancy phrase. Pre-existing conditions are people; like your neighbor with high-blood pressure, the person you attend church with who has diabetes, or your child’s friend from school who survived cancer.

As your next congressman, Reggie Thomas will fight not only to protect the health insurance you have but to make sure every Kentuckian has affordable health insurance. Because healthcare is a right, not a privilege.

In the greatest country on the face of the earth, no one should die from a preventable illness just because some insurance company wanted to pad its bottom line.

EDUCATION
Reggie’s mother brought him home to Kentucky after his father died when he was just 14 years old. Through his mother’s inspiration and his own hard work, he graduated from Bryan Station High School, Dartmouth College, and Harvard Law School.

As a young man with a law degree from Harvard, he could have gone anywhere, but for Reggie, there was only one choice… to come home to Kentucky to build a family.

Reggie and his late wife Lynda were blessed with three wonderful children who also graduated from Kentucky public schools and who have gone on to get college degrees, have successful careers and are building families of their own.

There is a connection, a thread that runs from that scared little boy who lost his father way too early to the successful attorney, father, and grandfather who is running for Congress. That connection is education.

Reggie believes that with an education anything is possible.

As a state senator Reggie Thomas has fought against charter schools, and as your Congressman he will continue that fight and fight to ensure Kentucky public schools are community schools, not corporate compounds.

SAVING KENTUCKY JOBS
It’s no secret good paying jobs are hard to come by…

Reggie Thomas knows we need to do more to improve the job market. A quality education is one of the keys to doing that, but we must also develop workers with enhanced skills. Because better skills mean higher wages and higher wages equals better jobs!

A 21st Century infrastructure is also key. In Kentucky, we have hundreds of bridges that are below standard and thousands of miles of roads that haven’t been properly maintained. We also need modern infrastructure like high-speed internet.

Reggie believes we need to update our crumbling infrastructure and as our next congressman, he will fight to improve job training and to improve our infrastructure.

^[40]

”

—Reggie Thomas for Congress^[43]

Media coverage

Lexington Herald-Leader editorial board (May 13, 2018):

"Democrats in the 6th Congressional District have a tough decision but can’t go wrong.Three Democrats in the May 22 primary bring impressive bios and together exemplify a diversity that should make the district proud. If Democrats take the House, any of the three — Jim Gray, Amy McGrath, Reggie Thomas — could quickly become standouts.

We endorse Lexington Mayor Gray based on his record. Gray’s experience leading city government and helping build a family business into a global concern, plus the many bonds he has forged with individuals and institutions in Kentucky, would serve the district well. Gray is not the smoothest, doesn’t speak in sound bites. He is deliberative, data-driven, moderate — qualities that Congress sorely needs. He’s done an exemplary job in almost 12 years as mayor or vice mayor, solving problems by innovating and working with stakeholders. He builds consensus on tough community issues, ranging from police and fire pensions to the removal of downtown Confederate statues...

Lt. Col. McGrath, a retired Marine fighter pilot who taught at the Naval Academy, is a phenom. She ran in response to Donald Trump’s election, is part of a wave of women candidates and also one of the military vets who want to protect their country from being dragged into another war under false pretenses as she says happened in Iraq. McGrath’s urgency and intellect are formidable. So are her command of the issues and her ability to communicate. She’s a huge asset to Kentucky and should continue to seek ways to serve because she has a lot to offer."^[33]

Al Cross, Courier-Journal (May 11, 2018):

"For many Democrats in the district, McGrath looks like a better challenger to Barr – a fresh face with no record to attack (other than moving into the district when she retired), a military profile, and perhaps more salable in the district’s rural counties than a gay mayor of the state’s second-largest city.

Many voters may regard Gray as a sort of incumbent, a politician who has been asking for votes on TV in three of the last five years – for re-election in 2014, the Senate in 2016, and now. In this race, his early ads were lackluster, but now they’re better, touting his work against the opioid epidemic and his wish to help education, with a clip of Trump and Vice President Mike Pence – 'folks who would rather give tax breaks to rich folks than help kids.'"^[44]

Ronny Ellis, The Morehead News (April 28, 2018):

"The race for the Democratic nomination for Congress in Kentucky’s 6th District is showing signs of tightening...Early on Gray was christened the presumed favorite, but McGrath appears to be closing ground since the Gray campaign released a poll taken Mar. 3-6 which showed Gray with a large double-digit lead over McGrath and Thomas. McGrath’s campaign released its own poll earlier this week showing McGrath in the lead...

There’s also anecdotal evidence the race is tight. Robert Slaton of Georgetown is a Democrat who served as Health Commissioner in Julian Carroll’s administration and later as a medical administrator at the University of Louisville. He likes Gray and thinks Gray has done a good job as Mayor of Lexington.But he’s impressed with McGrath and thinks she’ll win a lot of women’s votes.

'They see her as a strong woman who won’t take stuff off of men,' Slaton said. 'I think that’s a key part of her support.'

Rita Smart is a former Democratic state legislator from Richmond. She told Gray, Thomas and McGrath she won’t take sides in the primary but will support the winner against Barr. But she says McGrath’s ads are effective.

'Everybody is talking about her,' Smart said. 'I don’t hear people talking a lot about the other candidates. They say she’s not a politician but she looks like she’ll be tough.'"^[45]

Race ratings

See also: Race rating definitions and methods

Race ratings: Kentucky's 6th Congressional District election, 2018
Race tracker	Race ratings
	October 30, 2018	October 23, 2018	October 16, 2018	October 9, 2018
The Cook Political Report	Toss-up	Toss-up	Toss-up	Toss-up
Inside Elections with Nathan L. Gonzales	Toss-up	Toss-up	Toss-up	Toss-up
Larry J. Sabato's Crystal Ball	Toss-up	Toss-up	Toss-up	Toss-up
Note: Ballotpedia updates external race ratings every two weeks throughout the election season.

District election history

2016

	2020 → ← 2016
Kentucky's 6th Congressional District
	Democratic primary; Republican primary; General election
Election details
	Filing deadline: January 30, 2018
	Primary: May 22, 2018; General: November 6, 2018; Pre-election incumbent:; Andy Barr (Republican)
How to vote
	Poll times: 6 a.m. to 6 p.m.; Voting in Kentucky
Race ratings
	Cook Partisan Voter Index (2018): R+9; Cook Political Report: Toss-up; Inside Elections: Toss-up; Sabato's Crystal Ball: Toss-up
Ballotpedia analysis
	U.S. Senate battlegrounds; U.S. House battlegrounds; Federal and state primary competitiveness; Ballotpedia's Election Analysis Hub, 2018
See also
	Kentucky's 6th Congressional District; 1st • 2nd • 3rd • 4th • 5th • 6th; Kentucky elections, 2018; U.S. Congress elections, 2018; U.S. Senate elections, 2018; U.S. House elections, 2018; Alabama U.S. House racesAlaska U.S. House racesArizona U.S. House racesArkansas U.S. House racesCalifornia U.S. House racesColorado U.S. House racesConnecticut U.S. House racesDelaware U.S. House racesFlorida U.S. House racesGeorgia U.S. House racesHawaii U.S. House racesIdaho U.S. House racesIllinois U.S. House racesIndiana U.S. House racesIowa U.S. House racesKansas U.S. House racesKentucky U.S. House racesLouisiana U.S. House racesMaine U.S. House racesMaryland U.S. House racesMassachusetts U.S. House racesMichigan U.S. House racesMinnesota U.S. House racesMississippi U.S. House racesMissouri U.S. House racesMontana U.S. House racesNebraska U.S. House racesNevada U.S. House racesNew Hampshire U.S. House racesNew Jersey U.S. House racesNew Mexico U.S. House racesNew York U.S. House racesNorth Carolina U.S. House racesNorth Dakota U.S. House racesOhio U.S. House racesOklahoma U.S. House racesOregon U.S. House racesPennsylvania U.S. House racesRhode Island U.S. House racesSouth Carolina U.S. House racesSouth Dakota U.S. House racesTennessee U.S. House racesTexas U.S. House racesUtah U.S. House racesVermont U.S. House racesVirginia U.S. House racesWashington U.S. House racesWest Virginia U.S. House racesWisconsin U.S. House racesWyoming U.S. House racesSubmit

See also: Kentucky's 6th Congressional District election, 2016

Heading into the election, Ballotpedia rated this race as safely Republican. Incumbent Andy Barr (R) won re-election to his third term, defeating challenger Nancy Jo Kemper (D) in the general election on November 8, 2016. Barr defeated Roger Brill in the Republican primary, while Kemper defeated Geoff Young to win the Democratic nomination. The primary elections took place on May 17, 2016.^[46]^[47]

**U.S. House, Kentucky District 6 General Election, 2016**
Party		Candidate	Vote %	Votes
	Republican	Andy Barr Incumbent	61.1%	202,099
	Democratic	Nancy Jo Kemper	38.9%	128,728
Total Votes				330,827
Source: Kentucky Secretary of State

**U.S. House, Kentucky District 6 Republican Primary, 2016**
Candidate	Vote %	Votes
Andy Barr Incumbent	84.5%	25,212
Roger Brill	15.5%	4,608
Total Votes		29,820
Source: Kentucky State Board of Elections

**U.S. House, Kentucky District 6 Democratic Primary, 2016**
Candidate	Vote %	Votes
Nancy Jo Kemper	80.1%	63,440
Geoff Young	19.9%	15,772
Total Votes		79,212
Source: Kentucky State Board of Elections

2014

See also: Kentucky's 6th Congressional District elections, 2014

The 6th Congressional District of Kentucky held an election for the U.S. House of Representatives on November 4, 2014. Incumbent Andy Barr (R) defeated challenger Elisabeth Jensen (D) in the general election.

**U.S. House, Kentucky District 6 General Election, 2014**
Party		Candidate	Vote %	Votes
	Republican	Andy Barr Incumbent	60%	147,404
	Democratic	Elisabeth Jensen	40%	98,290
Total Votes				245,694
Source: Kentucky Secretary of State

General election candidates

Andy Barr - Incumbent
Elisabeth Jensen

May 20, 2014, primary results

Republican Primary

Andy Barr - Incumbenta

Democratic Primary

Elisabeth Jensen: Director of the non-profit Race for Education^[48]a
Geoff Young^[49]

Failed to file

Michael Coblenz^[50]^[51]

Withdrew from race

Joe Palumbo^[52]^[53]

2012

See also: Kentucky's 6th Congressional District elections, 2012

The 6th Congressional District of Kentucky held an election for the U.S. House of Representatives on November 6, 2012. Republican Andy Barr defeated incumbent Ben Chandler in the election.^[54]

**U.S. House, Kentucky District 6 General Election, 2012**
Party		Candidate	Vote %	Votes
	Republican	Andy Barr	50.6%	153,222
	Democratic	Ben Chandler Incumbent	46.7%	141,438
	Independent	Randolph Vance	2.8%	8,340
Total Votes				303,000
Source: Kentucky Board of Elections "2012 General Election Official Vote Totals"

2010

On November 2, 2010, Ben Chandler won re-election to the United States House. He defeated Garland "Andy" Barr, (R), C. Wes Collins (Write-In) and Randolph S. Vance (Write-In) in the general election.^[55]

U.S. House, Kentucky District 6 General Election, 2010
Party		Candidate	Vote %	Votes
	Democratic	Ben Chandler incumbent	50.1%	119,812
	Republican	Garland "Andy" Barr	49.8%	119,164
	Write-in	C. Wes Collins	0.1%	225
	Write-in	Randolph S. Vance	0%	22
Total Votes				239,223

2008

On November 4, 2008, Ben Chandler won re-election to the United States House. He defeated Jon Larson (R) in the general election.^[56]

U.S. House, Kentucky District 6 General Election, 2008
Party		Candidate	Vote %	Votes
	Democratic	Ben Chandler incumbent	64.7%	203,764
	Republican	Jon Larson	35.3%	111,378
Total Votes				315,142

2006

On November 7, 2006, Ben Chandler won re-election to the United States House. He defeated Paul Ard (L) in the general election.^[57]

U.S. House, Kentucky District 6 General Election, 2006
Party		Candidate	Vote %	Votes
	Democratic	Ben Chandler incumbent	85.5%	158,765
	Libertarian	Paul Ard	14.5%	27,015
Total Votes				185,780

2004

On November 2, 2004, Ben Chandler won re-election to the United States House. He defeated Tom Buford (R), Mark Gailey (L) and Stacy Abner (Constitution Party) in the general election.^[58]

U.S. House, Kentucky District 6 General Election, 2004
Party		Candidate	Vote %	Votes
	Democratic	Ben Chandler incumbent	58.6%	175,355
	Republican	Tom Buford	40%	119,716
	Libertarian	Mark Gailey	0.6%	1,758
	Constitution Party	Stacy Abner	0.8%	2,388
Total Votes				299,217

2002

On November 5, 2002, Ernie Fletcher won re-election to the United States House. He defeated Gatewood Galbraith (I) and Mark Gailey (L) in the general election.^[59]

U.S. House, Kentucky District 6 General Election, 2002
Party		Candidate	Vote %	Votes
	Republican	Ernie Fletcher incumbent	72%	115,622
	Independent	Gatewood Galbraith	26%	41,753
	Libertarian	Mark Gailey	2.1%	3,313
Total Votes				160,688

2000

On November 7, 2000, Ernie Fletcher won re-election to the United States House. He defeated Scotty Baesler (D), Gatewood Galbraith (I) and Joseph Novak (L) in the general election.^[60]

U.S. House, Kentucky District 6 General Election, 2000
Party		Candidate	Vote %	Votes
	Republican	Ernie Fletcher incumbent	52.8%	142,971
	Democratic	Scotty Baesler	34.8%	94,167
	Independent	Gatewood Galbraith	12%	32,436
	Libertarian	Joseph Novak	0.5%	1,229
Total Votes				270,803

Redistricting

2010-2011

This is the 6th Congressional District of Kentucky after the 2001 redistricting process.

See also: Redistricting in Kentucky

In 2011, the Kentucky State Legislature re-drew the congressional districts based on updated population information from the 2010 census.

District analysis

See also: The Cook Political Report's Partisan Voter Index

See also: FiveThirtyEight's elasticity scores

The 2017 Cook Partisan Voter Index for this district was R+9, meaning that in the previous two presidential elections, this district's results were 9 percentage points more Republican than the national average. This made Kentucky's 6th Congressional District the 147th most Republican nationally.^[61]

FiveThirtyEight's September 2018 elasticity score for states and congressional districts measured "how sensitive it is to changes in the national political environment." This district's elasticity score was 0.92. This means that for every 1 point the national political mood moved toward a party, the district was expected to move 0.92 points toward that party.^[62]

State overview

Partisan control

This section details the partisan control of federal and state positions in Kentucky heading into the 2018 elections.

Congressional delegation

Following the 2016 elections, Republicans held both U.S. Senate seats in Kentucky.
Republicans held five of the six U.S. House seats in Kentucky.

State executives

As of May 2018, Republicans held five of 11 state executive positions, and Democrats held two. Four state executive positions were held by nonpartisan officials.
The governor of Kentucky was Republican Matt Bevin.

State legislature

Republicans controlled both chambers of the Kentucky State Legislature. As of September, 2018, they had a 63-37 majority in the state House and a 27-11 majority in the state Senate.

Trifecta status

Kentucky was a Republican trifecta, meaning that the Republican Party held the governorship and both chambers of the state legislature.

2018 elections

See also: Kentucky elections, 2018

Kentucky held elections for the following positions in 2018:

Demographics

Demographic data for Kentucky
	Kentucky	U.S.
Total population:	4,424,611	316,515,021
Land area (sq mi):	39,486	3,531,905
Race and ethnicity**
White:	87.6%	73.6%
Black/African American:	7.9%	12.6%
Asian:	1.3%	5.1%
Native American:	0.2%	0.8%
Pacific Islander:	0%	0.2%
Two or more:	2.1%	3%
Hispanic/Latino:	3.3%	17.1%
Education
High school graduation rate:	84.2%	86.7%
College graduation rate:	22.3%	29.8%
Income
Median household income:	$43,740	$53,889
Persons below poverty level:	22.7%	11.3%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, "American Community Survey" (5-year estimates 2010-2015) Click here for more information on the 2020 census and here for more on its impact on the redistricting process in Kentucky. **Note: Percentages for race and ethnicity may add up to more than 100 percent because respondents may report more than one race and the Hispanic/Latino ethnicity may be selected in conjunction with any race. Read more about race and ethnicity in the census here.

As of July 2016, Kentucky had a population of approximately 4,436,974 people, with its three largest cities being Louisville (pop. est. 616,261), Lexington (pop. est. 318,449), and Bowling Green (pop. est. 65,234).^[63] The chart on the right shows demographic information for Kentucky from 2010 to 2015. The graphs below show racial demographics and levels of educational attainment in Kentucky compared to the rest of the country.

State history

This section provides an overview of federal and state elections in Kentucky from 2000 to 2016. All data comes from the Kentucky State Board of Elections.

Historical elections

Presidential elections, 2000-2016

This chart shows the results of the presidential election in Kentucky every year from 2000 to 2016.

Election results (President of the United States), Kentucky 2000-2016
Year	First-place candidate	First-place candidate votes (%)	Second-place candidate	Second-place candidate votes (%)	Margin of victory (%)
2016	Donald Trump	62.5%	Hillary Clinton	32.7%	29.8%
2012	Mitt Romney	60.5%	Barack Obama	37.8%	22.7%
2008	John McCain	57.4%	Barack Obama	41.2%	16.2%
2004	George W. Bush	59.6%	John Kerry	39.7%	19.9%
2000	George W. Bush	56.5%	Al Gore	41.2%	15.3%

U.S. Senate elections, 2002-2016

This chart shows the results of U.S. Senate races in Kentucky from 2002 to 2016. Every state has two Senate seats, and each seat goes up for election every six years. The terms of the seats are staggered so that roughly one-third of the seats are up every two years.

Election results (U.S. Senator), Kentucky 2002-2016
Year	First-place candidate	First-place candidate votes (%)	Second-place candidate	Second-place candidate votes (%)	Margin of victory (%)
2016	Rand Paul	57.3%	Jim Gray	42.7%	14.6%
2014	Mitch McConnell	56.2%	Alison Lundergan Grimes	40.7%	15.5%
2010	Rand Paul	55.7%	Jack Conway	44.2%	11.5%
2008	Mitch McConnell	53.0%	Bruce Lunsford	47.0%	6.0%
2004	Jim Bunning	50.7%	Daniel Mongiardo	49.3%	1.4%
2002	Mitch McConnell	64.7%	Lois Combs Weinberg	35.3%	29.4%

Gubernatorial elections, 2003-2015

This chart shows the results of the gubernatorial elections held between 2003 and 2015. Gubernatorial elections are held every four years in Kentucky.

Election results (Governor), Kentucky 2003-2015
Year	First-place candidate	First-place candidate votes (%)	Second-place candidate	Second-place candidate votes (%)	Margin of victory (%)
2015	Matt Bevin	52.5%	Jack Conway	43.8%	8.7%
2011	Steve Beshear	55.7%	David Williams	35.3%	20.4%
2007	Steve Beshear	58.7%	Ernie Fletcher	41.3%	17.4%
2003	Ernie Fletcher	55.0%	Ben Chandler	45.0%	10.0%

Congressional delegation, 2000-2016

This chart shows the number of Democrats and Republicans who were elected to represent Kentucky in the U.S. House from 2000 to 2016. Elections for U.S. House seats are held every two years.

Congressional delegation, Kentucky 2000-2016
Year	Republicans	Republicans (%)	Democrats	Democrats (%)	Balance of power
2016	5	83.3%	1	16.7%	R+4
2014	5	83.3%	1	16.7%	R+4
2012	5	83.3%	1	16.7%	R+4
2010	4	66.7%	2	33.3%	R+2
2008	4	66.7%	2	33.3%	R+2
2006	4	66.7%	2	33.3%	R+2
2004	5	83.3%	1	16.7%	R+4
2002	5	83.3%	1	16.7%	R+4
2000	5	83.3%	1	16.7%	R+4

Trifectas, 1992-2017

A state government trifecta occurs when one party controls both chambers of the state legislature and the governor's office.

Kentucky Party Control: 1992-2025
Eight years of Democratic trifectas • Three years of Republican trifectas
Scroll left and right on the table below to view more years.

Year	92	93	94	95	96	97	98	99	00	01	02	03	04	05	06	07	08	09	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17	18	19	20	21	22	23	24	25
Governor	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	R	R	R	R	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	R	R	R	R	D	D	D	D	D	D
Senate	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R
House	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R

Footnotes

[show]

Kentucky's current delegation to the United States Congress

Senators

Mitch McConnell (R)

Rand Paul (R)

Representatives

District 1

James Comer (R)

District 2

Brett Guthrie (R)

District 3

Morgan McGarvey (D)

District 4

Thomas Massie (R)

District 5

Hal Rogers (R)

District 6

Andy Barr (R)

Republican Party (7)

Democratic Party (1)

[lhl-1] Lexington Herald-Leader, "Lexington Mayor Jim Gray running for Congress," December 5, 2017

[thehill-2] The Hill, "Seven primary races to watch in 2018," December 25, 2017

[3] Vox, "This Democrat thinks she can win in 'Trump country' Kentucky," January 17, 2018

[south-4] 4.0 ^4.1 ^4.2 ^4.3 Southern Political Report, "Kentucky: Democrats vie to take on Barr," April 2, 2018

[5] Kentucky State Board of Elections, "2018 Kentucky election calendar," accessed January 15, 2018

[absentee-6] 6.0 ^6.1 Kentucky State Board of Elections, "Absentee voter information," accessed January 15, 2018

[7] Spectrum News, "Gray rakes in fundraising haul, releases polling; McGrath Campaign remains close in fundraising, offers their own poll," April 6, 2018

[8] Lexington Herald-Leader, "Who’s pulling ahead in the battle for money in Central Kentucky’s congressional race?," April 16, 2018

[may9spending-9] 9.0 ^9.1 ^9.2 ProPublica, "Kentucky’s 6th District House Race - 2018 cycle," accessed May 9, 2018

[fec-10] Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named fec

[graybio-11] 11.0 ^11.1 Jim Gray for Congress, "About Jim Gray," accessed February 9, 2018

[12] YouTube, "Jim Gray for Congress," January 29, 2018

[13] Lexington Herald Leader, "Lexington Mayor Jim Gray running for Congress," December 5, 2017

[pelosi-14] 14.0 ^14.1 McClatchy DC, "Nancy Pelosi is all but a dirty word in Kentucky Democratic primary for Congress," May 15, 2018

[victoryfundendorsement-15] 15.0 ^15.1 Victory Fund, "23 more LGBTQ champions for equality endorsed by Victory Fund," January 23, 2018

[wapo-16] 16.0 ^16.1 ^16.2 ^16.3 ^16.4 Washington Post, "Emerging Democratic Party united on liberal policies but divided on how to win," March 31, 2018

[17] Amy McGrath for Congress, "Meet Amy," accessed February 9, 2018

[18] '"Amy McGrath for Congress, "Told me," August 1, 2017

[19] Amy McGrath for Congress, "Home," accessed February 9, 2018

[20] Richmond Register, "ELECTION 2018: McGrath hits the campaign trail," May 6, 2018

[moultonendorsement-21] 21.0 ^21.1 The News & Observer, "Rising Dem star Moulton grants seal of approval to three House candidates," August 9, 2017

[votevetsendorsement-22] 22.0 ^22.1 VoteVets.org, "VoteVets PAC endorses Amy McGrath for Congress," accessed January 19, 2018

[23] Reggie Thomas for Congress, "Home," accessed April 3, 2018

[reaction-24] 24.0 ^24.1 Vox, "Amy McGrath’s victory speech: “Establishment insiders didn’t think we could pull this off”," May 22, 2018

[25] CNN, "Fighter pilot McGrath wins Kentucky House primary," May 22, 2018

[26] Think Progress, "Massive Democratic turnout in rural Kentucky propels progressive Amy McGrath to upset victory," May 22, 2018

[27] Lexington Herald-Leader, "Who’s pulling ahead in the battle for money in Central Kentucky’s congressional race?," April 16, 2018

[28] Lexington Herald-Leader, "Lexington Mayor Jim Gray running for Congress," December 5, 2017

[29] Lexington Herald-Leader, "Who’s pulling ahead in the battle for money in Central Kentucky’s congressional race?," April 16, 2018

[30] FEC, "Federal Election Commission", accessed February 13, 2018

[31] Reggie Thomas for Congress, "NANCY JO KEMPER ENDORSES REGGIE THOMAS," February 7, 2018

[32] CNN, "Democratic House primary in Kentucky pits openly gay mayor against female fighter pilot," May 21, 2018

[LHLendorse-33] 33.0 ^33.1 Lexington Herald-Leader, "Jim Gray for 6th District Democrats," May 13, 2018

[34] Jim Gray for Congress, "STEELWORKERS ENDORSE JIM GRAY FOR CONGRESS," April 21, 2018

[35] Twitter, "Amy McGrath on March 15, 2018," accessed March 15, 2018

[36] U.S. News and World Report, "Democrats Lay Out Health Care Plans in Televised Debate," April 18, 2018

[37] Richmond Register, "ELECTION 2018: Is Democratic race in Sixth Congressional district tightening?," April 26, 2018

[negative-38] 38.0 ^38.1 Lexington Herald-Leader, "Jim Gray goes negative in TV ad attacking Amy McGrath for recently moving to Kentucky," May 18, 2018

[39] CNN, "Kentucky Democrat says she's pulling ads from Sinclair station, calls for boycott," April 2, 2018

[quotedisclaimer-40] 40.0 ^40.1 ^40.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.

[41] Jim Gray for Congress, "Issues," accessed April 3, 2018

[42] Amy McGrath for Congress, "Home," accessed February 26, 2018

[43] Reggie Thomas for Congress, "Issues," accessed April 3, 2018

[44] Courier-Journal, "Support for fresh faces could help Democrats in Kentucky's elections," May 11, 2018

[45] The Morehead News, "Is race in 6th Congressional district tightening?," April 28, 2018

[soslist-46] Kentucky Secretary of State, "Candidate Filings with the Office of the Secretary of State," accessed January 27, 2016

[primary16-47] The New York Times, "Kentucky Results," May 17, 2016

[48] Kentucky.com "Education advocate Elisabeth Jensen to challenge U.S. Rep. Andy Barr" accessed June 19, 2013

[49] Pure Politics, "Lexington Democrat Geoff Young first to file to run for Congress," accessed December 4, 2013

[50] Kentucky Secretary of State Elections Division, "Candidate List," accessed January 29,l 2014

[51] CN|2 "Democrat Michael Coblenz announces candidacy for 6th Congressional District race" accessed July 19, 2013

[52] Kentucky.com, "Joe Palumbo withdraws from Central Kentucky congressional race," accessed November 11, 2013

[53] CN|2 "Joe Palumbo running for Democratic nomination for 6th Congressional District" accessed July 19, 2013

[54] Politico, "2012 Election Map, Kentucky"

[55] U.S. Congress House Clerk, "Statistics of the Congressional Election of November 2, 2010," accessed March 28, 2013

[56] U.S. Congress House Clerk, "Statistics of the Congressional Election of November 4, 2008," accessed March 28, 2013

[57] U.S. Congress House Clerk, "Statistics of the Congressional Election of November 7, 2006," accessed March 28, 2013

[58] U.S. Congress House Clerk, "Statistics of the Congressional Election of November 2, 2004," accessed March 28, 2013

[59] U.S. Congress House Clerk, "Statistics of the Congressional Election of November 5, 2002," accessed March 28, 2013

[60] U.S. Congress House Clerk, "Statistics of the Congressional Election of November 7, 2000," accessed March 28, 2013

[61] Cook Political Report, "Introducing the 2017 Cook Political Report Partisan Voter Index," April 7, 2017

[62] FiveThirtyEight, "Election Update: The Most (And Least) Elastic States And Districts," September 6, 2018

[63] United States Census Bureau, "Quick Facts - Kentucky," accessed January 23, 2018

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32]

[33]

[34]

[35]

[36]

[37]

[38]

[39]

[40]

[41]

[42]

[43]

[44]

[45]

[46]

[47]

[48]

[49]

[50]

[51]

[52]

[53]

[54]

[55]

[56]

[57]

[58]

[59]

[60]

[61]

[62]

[63]

Kentucky's 6th Congressional District election (May 22, 2018 Democratic primary)

Candidates and election results

Democratic primary election

Democratic primary for U.S. House Kentucky District 6

Election updates

Endorsements

Polls

Campaign finance

Candidate forums

Satellite spending

Candidates

Top candidates

Jim Gray (D)

Amy McGrath (D)

Reggie Thomas (D)

List of all candidates

Political reaction to outcome

Timeline

Campaign finance

Satellite spending

Polls

Endorsements

How did the candidates differ?

Campaign strategies and tactics

DCCC involvement

McGrath's ties to district

Campaign advertisements

Jim Gray

Amy McGrath

Reggie Thomas

Campaign themes and policy stances

Jim Gray

Amy McGrath

Reggie Thomas

Media coverage

Race ratings

District election history

2016

2014

Failed to file

Withdrew from race

2012

2010

2008

2006

2004

2002

2000

Redistricting

2010-2011

District analysis

State overview

Partisan control

Congressional delegation

State executives

State legislature

Trifecta status

2018 elections

Demographics

State history

Historical elections

Presidential elections, 2000-2016

U.S. Senate elections, 2002-2016

Gubernatorial elections, 2003-2015

Congressional delegation, 2000-2016

Trifectas, 1992-2017

See also

Footnotes

Information about voting

2025 Elections

2026 Elections

Election analysis

Trending

Public Policy

Information for candidates

Get Engaged

Services

Additional analysis

SITE NAVIGATION